Bret and all,
Bret A. Fausett wrote:
> >So, it seems to me a better idea that declaring
> >the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list as the regular expression
> >of the general assembly of the DNSO would be to
> >use the IFWP list for that purpose; it may take months
> >or perhaps even a year to get the dnso list to the size
> >the ifwp list.
> >
> >Are there any reasons why this shouldn't be done ?
>
> The only obstacles that I can see are:
>
> (1) ifwp is, as far as I know, completely unmoderated without any rules
> for participation, civility, etc. Participation would be enhanced by the
> addition of such rules;
True. It would be determinant on WHAT exactly those rules are however.
>
>
> (2) as far as I know, ifwp is not archived, and we'd want to start
> keeping copies of the general assembly list; and
Wrong. You obviously have not been paying much attention. The
IFWP list is and as far as I know, has always been archived. This
is in stark contrast to the DNSO [EMAIL PROTECTED] list whose archives
are grossly inaccurate presently.
>
>
> (3) new participants may be confused by the name of the list.
Possibly.
>
>
> But these are trivial and could be changed easily.
>
> -- Bret
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
